Javier Solana was EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, Secretary-General of NATO, and Foreign Minister of Spain. He is currently President of the ESADE Center for Global Economy and Geopolitics, Distinguished Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a member of the World Economic Fo… read more

Comments

It's important in these discussions to grasp the difference between (absolute) emissions and emissions intensity. The latter is the ratio of emissions to GDP, so a cut in emissions intensity can happen by raising GDP without increasing emissions. That's a good thing, of course, but it is perfectly consistent with absolute emissions rising without limit. And it's the absolute level of emissions that is going to do us in. Read more

Solana opens with his premise and what should be our collective premise. Obviously economy is relative to profitability in any instance. What we have to realize in a global sense is that we will all profit from a thriving planet (or perish trying). Boosting policy ambition is the challenge isn't it? The consolation is that negotiators are at work and that even within the clouds of pollution they can attempt to clear the air. Read more

If we are only talking renewables, and not nuclear which is the only existing technology to fill the gap, then we are not serious. If smart people still think we don't need to be serious, we are probably not near a point of no return. Pick your poison - are we still just posing about catastrophe because it makes for feel-good press and lots of conference travel? Or is it real and we have to discuss realistic choices that include base power supply? Read more

Javier Solana's well articulated ideas help bring policies from antagonistic exchanges to more measured discussions. The population will continue to grow up, per Hans Rolling, to 11 billion in 2010 while CO2 levels continue to creep up. Although I will be long gone, my grandchildren and descendants will feel the pain. I fear for their future.

One issue, morbid as it might be, is the lack of a clear understanding of the expected damage, running from increased insurance premiums, higher insidence of contagious diseases, or a crushed agriculture from a shortened cycle of intense droughts and floods. The damage caused by rising sea levels and temperatures, combined with stronger hurricanes or typhoons may yet ruin the booming tourists industry, or destroy major infrastructure. Island nations will suffer the most, but poor countries, with few options will see their quality of life, and political peace, sufffer,...and in some case, climate variability could force their population to become hectic climate migrants. The leadership expected from major nations like Japan has disappointed everyone. Another archipielago, the U.K., has blocked more than pushed the necessary forward momentum, draining the "energy" needed to reach scapee velocity on these issues.Unfortately, in my great country, the U.S., our political leaders controlling Congress keep telling our industry they should not worry about climate change because it does not exist. Pope Francis, when he addressed both chambers, made only one direct request: a better stewardship of the pollutants accelerating the rushing catastrophe. They paid no attention to this request, not to the powerful Laudato Si. And in so doing, their rhetoric tells major polluters, like China, India, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Brasil, and the rest that they should not worry about climate change. Why? Because the powerful U.S. Congress has claimed, time and time again, it does not exist. It would not be surprising if American Congresspersons derail Cops 21 in Paris--with their expensive trip and amusements footed by the American taxpayer.

Gracias, Javier Solana, keep up your convincing views. We need them but I despair the U.S. Congress will prevail until something big, like a rosary of Katrinas destroys U.S. coastal cities.Read more

It would not be so sad if rather than individual nation states offering up ad hoc INDCs as to what they think they need to commit to, which have up until now fallen far short of what has to be achieved to have a plus 66% chance of limiting warming to 2 deg C, that they be given stringent targets to consider by WHO, UN, IPCC whoever. What seems appropriate to me is that we have an ever diminishing carbon budget that has to be equatable shared among emitting states, which should likely be based on their specific per capita emissions and a set time frame in which to de-carbonise their bailiwick.

Also much is said about total reliance on renewables in a post fossil era when apart from various computer model scenarios or nation states with ample hydro or enhanced geothermal resources, no one yet seems to have achieved a workable renewable mix without some sort of 24/7 backup. Yes some solar and wind farms have some form of backup but just how viable these are on a macro scale is far from proven in the field.

Whatever we do re replacing fossil fuels with almost invariably mean the use of more fossil fuel emissions because of the proportion of fossil fuel in the global primary energy mix. So energy return on investment of replacement energy must be taken into account and the likes of batteries and biofuels do not appear to stack up very well in this field.

A real world, on-the-ground trial prototype grid, industry and transport complex in one or more representative regions would highlight any shortfalls and provide time to discover work arounds. The data gathered would be invaluable as we are only likely to get one shot at getting things right.

One last point is that I question the wisdom of adopting CO2 capture and sequestration due to the risks of securing for aeons a high pressure gas and the costs and energy use of doing so. This of course to me makes the time we have at our disposal all the less. Read more

this article is full of it, all its about is how much money and control they want over the people. when Europe and the middle east are on fire they can hope for hope and change...only GOD controls the climate NOT MAN. Just want to tax your lifestyle by a carbon tax Read more

I hope you don't listen to your medical scientific advisors either since they just want your money by that logic. The sooner you are gone the sooner the rest of us can start dealing with the real limit to humanity. The planet. You know the only one we have. The fact you sctuslly believe in god controlling the weather makes me wonder how humans even got to this point of Internet comments. You do realise how much science is involved in the Internet and infrastructure I hope. If not start learning about TCP/IP and fibre optics for a start. Read more

I read very little skepticism anywhere about the gap between the announcing of INDCs and their implementation. Canada, for example, has announced its INDC (rated as inadeqate by Climate Action Tracker by the way), a reduction of 2% below 1990 industrial GHG emissions levels by 2030.

Current policies, however, have Canada on a path towards 26% *above* 1990 by 2020 and 35% by 2030. We will see what the new government brings to the table in terms of new policies but it will be stunning to see anything that brings us back on to the path of our INDC.

PS On Air: The Super Germ Threat

NOV 2, 2016

In the latest edition of PS On
Air
, Jim O’Neill discusses how to beat antimicrobial resistance, which
threatens millions of lives, with Gavekal Dragonomics’ Anatole Kaletsky
and Leonardo Maisano of
Il Sole 24 Ore.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Sign up to receive newsletters about what's being discussed on Project Syndicate.

EmailReceive our Sunday newsletterA weekly collection of our most discussed columnsReceive our PS On Point newsletterStay informed of the world's leading opinions on global issues

Why not register an account with us, too? You'll be able to follow individual authors (to receive notifications whenever they publish new articles) and subscribe to more specific, topic-based newsletters.

Project Syndicate provides readers with original, engaging, and thought-provoking commentaries by global leaders and thinkers. By offering incisive perspectives from those who are shaping the world’s economics, politics, science, and culture, Project Syndicate has created an unrivaled global venue for informed public debate.